By Ellen Eisenberg

By Ellen Eisenberg, Executive Director of The Pennsylvania Institute for Instructional Coaching (PIIC)

Thursday, February 20, 2014

In the online February 17, Professional Learning News brief from Learning
Forward, a study by researchers at the University of Utah and Brigham Young
University concluded that when teachers participate in professional
development, students do better in assessments. These researchers
examined math and reading scores for students before and after teachers in
their schools began using an online professional development program. This
study took place over a two-year period, one the year prior to the adoption of
a PD tool and the year the teachers began using the tool.

Although this study took place over a short period of time, I think what
this confirms is what we know... teachers who regularly engage
in effective professional development benefit. Having said that, let me
clarify... teachers who regularly engage in ongoing professional development
with the opportunity for support and
follow up benefit the most. The expectation that effective professional
development yields effective professional learning is what makes a difference
in the classroom.

Professional learning occurs after the professional development has been
provided and teachers have an opportunity to engage in professional
conversations about what they learned. They need time to talk with one another
and discuss what they think students need to know and how they will engage
students in that process. Teachers need time to talk to their colleagues about
instruction. If the professional development is online, every effort must be
made to support that learning by having face-to-face conversations, both
one-on-one and in small groups, to ensure that the content is understood, the
goals are met, and learning is differentiated and can be adjusted to meet the
needs of all involved.

Sounds easier said than done but one thing is certain…instructional coaching
is the vehicle to build effective instructional practices, skills, and
knowledge so that all students are in classrooms with highly effective
teachers.

Thursday, February 6, 2014

During the last week, my conversations with coaches revolved
around the evaluation process for coaches. This is still a relatively new
concept for instructional coaches and their administrators. One key idea to
keep in mind is the similarity between the confidential conversations in which
coaches engage with teachers and the kinds of confidential conversations in
which counselors engage with teachers and their students. In both situations,
administrators are not privy to the content of the conversations nor are other
teachers privy to those conversations unless there are extenuating circumstances.

This process can be challenging. For instance, what exactly
should administrators know about the conversations coaches and teachers have or
counselors, teachers, and students have? Of course, administrators need to know
that those conversations take place even though the nature of the conversations
must remain private. At which point do counselors or instructional coaches
share their discussions with their administrators?

In the Pennsylvania Department of Education job description
for coaches, it clearly states that the roles and responsibilities of the coach
include… “Building and maintaining
confidential relationships with teachers. The conversations and interactions
that the coach has with teachers must always remain confidential so that a high
level of trust is created and maintained between the teacher and the coach.” So, how is this accomplished without
breaching confidentiality?

First, we must help administrators understand that coach “advocates for, facilitates, and supports
the work of the teacher, but never performs supervision or evaluation.” So, the administrator needs to know that the teacher is being supported but
not ask the coach if the specific teacher was receptive to the support or the
coach’s opinion about the teacher’s practice. If the administrator engages in instructional
learning visits (ILVs), s/he will be sure to see evidence of ongoing
professional learning in classrooms. Second, coaches should share with
administrators the kinds of support provided, e.g., various evidence-based
literacy strategies, understanding and using data, student engagement
strategies, etc., but not the specific teachers’ names working with the coach or
the substance of that support. Thirdly, administrators can allocate time for
coaches and teachers to collaborate in PLCs and then visit those PLCs to
participate in the shared learning.

These are just a few ways that administrators can become
part of a transparent learning environment without asking coaches to breach
confidentiality and share details about conversations between and among
teachers and their coaches.